What promise do we make to visitors?

AAM2016’s theme was heavy – “Power, influence and responsibility” – and widely interpreted.  Among two of the most notable talks were Kaywin Feldman’s elegant polemic on being “too young and too female” for a directorship position (her presentation was literally met by audience cheers) and David Rubenstein ’s affirmation that he puts historic documents he owns on view for the American public to see. But short of wielding power and influence at their levels, the rest of us also have a responsibility to museum visitors.

While my presentation about a selfie app (made in partnership between the Milwaukee Art Museum and Antenna) may seem more fun than serious, there is an element of gravitas when we empower our visitors to be content creators.  The museum has the power to focus visitor’s attention of specific works of art and their stories – in this case, the portrait miniatures whose identities have been lost to time.  Our influence emboldens present day visitors to become active participants in and have visual “conversations” with the museum, by making selfies.  And it’s our responsibility to create the tools that enable this to be possible.  I’ve related these ideas and the selfie generation app to Clay Shirky’s concept of the “Plausible Promise” which explains that participation comes when there are specific goals, tools to achieve those goals and opportunities for sharing and success.  In my opinion, the responsibility that we collectively make to every visitor (in the gallery and online) should be that they will learn and experience something extraordinary and that we will provide the tools to do that – be it an app, an activity, or the ability to see the world’s greatest treasures.

This presentation was accompanied by me explaining each slide and providing a narrative to tie it all together.  So if you want to know more, reply in the comments or give me a shout on Twitter.

And finally, a big thanks to my fellow panelists who presented their academic take on selfie culture (Jeff Bowen of University of Houston-Clear Lake Art Gallery), a case study on a pointillism selfie photo booth (Brooke Rosenblatt of Phillips Collection and the Freer|Sackler), and a case study on the Dali selfie kiosk (Kathy Greif of The Dalí Museum).


Matchmaking MetGala with the Online Collections

I was passively following E!RedCarpet‘s broadcast of the Met Gala for Manus x Machina, until Kim Kardashian appeared on screen.  While she embodied the futuristic theme, the bust of her dress looked suspiciously like the silver seashells at the museum.  I quickly googled them.  Soon, I was live tweeting the Red Carpet.  Kim, Katy, and Zendaya were undoubtably dressed as the Met’s collection.


Some were harder to match than others and I started spending more time looking through the online collections.  What was the most unique characteristic of the celebrity outfit? What searchable term should be entered into the collection’s database? Would the metadata yield a viable comparison?


Some comparisons were obvious (Alicia Vikander/French Costume Armor), while other comparisons were a total surprise, yet near perfect nonetheless (Kate Bosworth/Turkish Shield).  Digging through the fashion collection for a Kendall equivalent yielded nothing, until I switched to American Modernism (Georgia O’Keeffe).


As I was dashing virtually across the grand stairwell of the Met, though the Greek and Roman Halls and into the period rooms, following link after link, I made discoveries in the collection.  Did you know they have a collection of tassels? Or snake skin hats?

My best find was, of course, for Beyonce.  Our “Queen Bey” has truly embodied a piece of Serves porcelain.  The color matches well and her arms are the elephant trunks.  It is undeniable.


This pursuit was a ton of fun.  I crossed the world of art in a few short hours drawing inspiration from various geographies, jumping through time and space.  Museum staff may not know when our online collections will be of use, nor how the public will draw upon them.  But it happens – serendipitously.

So a big thanks to the Met website for enabling an evening of educational fun, and another big thanks to some important retweets from a Met Curator (James Doyle), the American Alliance of Museums, and even an art critic (Lee Rosenbaum).


Your move Anna.


UPDATE: The Sun featured my 2017 MetGala tweet about Tracee Ellis Ross in their article FROCKY HORROR Met Gala 2017: From Katy Perry’s Thinly-Veiled Catastrophe To Madonna’s Camo Combo These Are The Worst Looks On This Year’s Red Carpet.



Wikipedia in the “Scale” of Online Museum Publishing

During last weekend’s Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon (which I attended at MoMA) the Editors’ Tutorial presentation stated “all materials in Wikipedia must be attributed to a reliable, published source.”  What exactly makes a source reliable, the audience asked? The editors’ team conferred and decided gallery websites weren’t objective enough, resources the Museum was providing would be a good start, and if contributors weren’t sure about a source, they could ask one of the museum staff members for help.

Since I’ve been looking at the differences between museum-created-publications and museum-sanctioned-publications, this raised questions. Is a museum-sponsored edit-a-thon article “museum-created”, “museum-sanctioned”, both or neither?  How does directly involving museum staff members alter the nature of the articles, if at all?

Orit Gat, (who was also a speaker at the Art+Feminism event) defines museum-created-publications by dividing them into two categories: the first category perpetuates the institution’s mission through published formal research and the second category has a separate, complimentary identity as a behind-the-scenes look at the institution.  Of those two, museum staff contributing to Wikipedia would be more similar to the first category, since the contributing staff are amalgamating published, formal research. But contributing to a non-museum website using materials from the official MoMA library seemed different.  Is it another category?  Lori Byrd Phillips addressed this by coining the phrase open authority. “Opening up authority,” she explains, “within a global platform can increase points of view and establish a more complete representation of knowledge.” Her example of Wikipedia is as follows:

“In fact, the Wikipedia articles themselves can be viewed as a sort of authority in flux, where the best version of the moment is presented for view while details are continually negotiated behind the scenes. In this temple it is understood that no narrative is definitive, neutrality is the goal but bias is inherent, and interpretation is continuously improved through an abundance of perspectives.”

In relation to Gat’s groupings, does open authority fit within the categories of museum publishing or is it separate?  Thinking about the Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon, when museum staffers contributed to a Wikipedia entry, is that article a type of museum publication? What about an article that had staff and non-staff contributions? Or an article written during the edit-a-thon that used the museum’s published resources, but didn’t involve their staff? Does a staff member have the responsibility to drive the museum’s mission on a non-museum platform, if Wikipedia is a type of museum publishing?

Not sure what I think of it yet, but it circles back to my main question: How is the museum identifying and behaving in web culture?

People Magazine, Museum Studies, and me.

When People Magazine starts writing articles about graduate level Museum Studies departments, it is probably as good a time as ever to announce that I, too, am a student in that department.

People Magazine Tweet
We overlapped as students for exactly a day and a half, but I’ll just blissfully assume that all the paparazzi fanfare at graduation was standard and anticipate getting my own article in People.

I’m pleased to share that I am now a PhD student at the UK’s University of Leicester School of Museum Studies in their part-time distance learning division.   It’s an honor (honour?) to be studying at the top museum research school in the world under the direction of their faculty scholars.  What’s that feeling? Oh, that’s the “Impostor Syndrome” hitting me now.

Doing this degree by distance learning is amazingly logical once one wraps their head around how the British educational system works.  There, PhD students already have their Masters degrees, so there is no taught component – therefore, the meetings with one’s advisor are via Skype, scholarly articles are emailed, and research is conducted at any museum around the world.  This also means that I’m still living and working (full-time at Antenna) on this side of the Atlantic.

I’m not quite ready to share the details of my research topic just yet.  For those of you who do know me, you won’t be surprised; it combines my interest in the behind-the-scenes of museums with my favorite hobby, reading things on the Internet.

So here is the first post of my PhD blog, which will soon be full of my hopefully astute, thought provoking postgraduate insights about the museum world.  And congratulations Princess Mako on your graduation, from your fellow student for a day and a half.